Literature DB >> 23846364

Revisional weight loss surgery after failed laparoscopic gastric banding: an institutional experience.

Tung T Tran1, Eric Pauli, Jerome R Lyn-Sue, Randy Haluck, Ann M Rogers.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Increasing experience with laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding (LAGB) has demonstrated a high rate of complications and inadequate weight loss. Laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (LRYGB) and laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) have been reported to be safe and effective in selected patients. The purpose of our study was to evaluate the incidence and outcomes of revisional weight loss surgery (RWLS) after laparoscopic gastric banding at our institution.
METHODS: From June 2006 to February 2013, all patients who underwent LAGB and those who required revision were retrospectively analyzed. All procedures were performed by two surgeons with extensive experience in bariatric surgery. Parametric data are presented as mean ± SD; nonparametric data are presented as median and interquartile range (IQR).
RESULTS: During the study period, 256 patients underwent LAGB. A total of 111 patients (43 %) required reoperation. Sixty-one patients (56 women, age = 43.7 ± 12 years) with a BMI of 45.4 ± 6 kg/m(2) successfully underwent RWLS (53 RYGB, 8 LSG). Indications for RWLS included dysphagia (40 patients, 63 %), inadequate weight loss (17 patients, 27 %), GERD (2 patients, 3 %), gastric prolapse (2 patients, 3 %), and needle phobia (1 patient, 2 %). Two required conversion to an open RYGB due to extensive adhesions. RWLS was undertaken approximately 36.3 [25-45] months after LAGB. Removal of the gastric band and the RWLS were performed in 15 patients with an interval of 3 [1.5-7] months between procedures. Median operative time was 165 [142-184] min. Median hospital length of stay was 2 [2-3] days. Early complications occurred in 11 patients (18 %), including 4 anastomotic leaks. Twelve patients (20 %) presented with late complications requiring intervention. There was one death. At a median follow-up of 12.4 months, excess weight loss was 47.5 ± 27 %, and 48 % of patients achieved a BMI < 33.
CONCLUSION: LAGB is associated with a high incidence of reoperation. Reoperative weight loss surgery can be performed in selected patients with a higher rate of complications than primary surgery. Good short-term weight loss outcomes can be achieved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23846364     DOI: 10.1007/s00464-013-3065-6

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Surg Endosc        ISSN: 0930-2794            Impact factor:   4.584


  38 in total

1.  Re-operations following laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding.

Authors:  Ralph Peterli; Andrea Donadini; Thomas Peters; Christoph Ackermann; Peter Tondelli
Journal:  Obes Surg       Date:  2002-12       Impact factor: 4.129

Review 2.  Surgical management of morbid obesity.

Authors:  Deron J Tessier; J Chris Eagon
Journal:  Curr Probl Surg       Date:  2008-02       Impact factor: 1.909

3.  Disappointing long-term results of laparoscopic adjustable silicone gastric banding.

Authors:  M Morino; M Toppino; C Garrone
Journal:  Br J Surg       Date:  1997-06       Impact factor: 6.939

4.  Re-operation after laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding leads to a further decrease in BMI and obesity-related co-morbidities: results in 33 patients.

Authors:  R Schouten; F M H van Dielen; J W M Greve
Journal:  Obes Surg       Date:  2006-07       Impact factor: 4.129

Review 5.  Methods for Voluntary Weight Loss and Control. Proceedings of NIH Technology Assessment Conference. Bethesda, Maryland, 30 March-1 April 1992.

Authors: 
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  1993-10-01       Impact factor: 25.391

6.  Laparoscopic adjustable silicone gastric banding (Lap-Band): how to avoid complications.

Authors:  F Favretti; G B Cadiere; G Segato; J Himpens; L Busetto; F De Marchi; M Vertruyen; G Enzi; M De Luca; M Lise
Journal:  Obes Surg       Date:  1997-08       Impact factor: 4.129

7.  Silicone-adjustable gastric banding: disappointing results.

Authors:  A Westling; K Bjurling; M Ohrvall; S Gustavsson
Journal:  Obes Surg       Date:  1998-08       Impact factor: 4.129

8.  Lap-band failures: conversion to gastric bypass and their preliminary outcomes.

Authors:  Shanu N Kothari; Eric J DeMaria; Harvey J Sugerman; John M Kellum; Jill Meador; Luke Wolfe
Journal:  Surgery       Date:  2002-06       Impact factor: 3.982

Review 9.  Gastric banding: conversion to sleeve, bypass, or DS.

Authors:  Michel Gagner; Andrew A Gumbs
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2007-08-20       Impact factor: 4.584

Review 10.  Laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding: complications and side effects responsible for the poor long-term outcome.

Authors:  Sven Gustavsson; Agneta Westling
Journal:  Semin Laparosc Surg       Date:  2002-06
View more
  15 in total

1.  Efficacy and safety of a resorbable collagen membrane COVA+™ for the prevention of postoperative adhesions in abdominal surgery.

Authors:  André Dabrowski; Marc Lepère; Constantin Zaranis; Club Coelio; Philippe Hauters
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2015-10-19       Impact factor: 4.584

2.  Band removal and conversion to sleeve or bypass: are they equally safe?

Authors:  B Fernando Santos; Jessica B Wallaert; Thadeus L Trus
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2014-05-22       Impact factor: 4.584

3.  Conversion of Laparoscopic Adjustable Gastric Banding to Gastric Bypass: a Comparison to Primary Gastric Bypass.

Authors:  Abbas Al-Kurd; Ronit Grinbaum; Ala'a Abubeih; Baha Siam; Muhammad Ghanem; Haggi Mazeh; Ido Mizrahi; Nahum Beglaibter
Journal:  Obes Surg       Date:  2018-06       Impact factor: 4.129

4.  Primary sleeve gastrectomy compared to sleeve gastrectomy as revisional surgery: weight loss and complications at intermediate follow-up.

Authors:  Allison M Barrett; Kim T Vu; Kulmeet K Sandhu; Edward H Phillips; Scott A Cunneen; Miguel A Burch
Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2014-08-14       Impact factor: 3.452

5.  Long-Term Outcomes of Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass Conversion of Failed Laparoscopic Gastric Band.

Authors:  Hanaa N Dakour Aridi; Mohammad-Rachad Wehbe; Ghassan Shamseddine; Ramzi S Alami; Bassem Y Safadi
Journal:  Obes Surg       Date:  2017-06       Impact factor: 4.129

6.  Perioperative risk and complications of revisional bariatric surgery compared to primary Roux-en-Y gastric bypass.

Authors:  Linda Zhang; Wen Hui Tan; Ronald Chang; J C Eagon
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2014-10-08       Impact factor: 4.584

7.  The Effect of Dumping on Weight Loss in Conversion of Failed Restrictive Surgery: a Cross-Sectional Pilot Study.

Authors:  Ruth Van Looveren; Yannick Mandeville; Pieter Logghe; Katrien Vandendriessche; Xander Verbeke; Patrick Vuylsteke; Paul Pattyn; Bart Smet
Journal:  Obes Surg       Date:  2018-03       Impact factor: 4.129

8.  Risk Factors for Postoperative Morbidity After Totally Robotic Gastric Bypass in 302 Consecutive Patients.

Authors:  G Fantola; P L Nguyen-Thi; N Reibel; M A Sirveaux; A Germain; A Ayav; L Bresler; R Zarnegar; L Brunaud
Journal:  Obes Surg       Date:  2015-07       Impact factor: 4.129

9.  Routine Postoperative Monitoring after Bariatric Surgery in Morbidly Obese Patients with Severe Obstructive Sleep Apnea: ICU Admission is not Necessary.

Authors:  Amin B Goucham; Usha K Coblijn; Helga B Hart-Sweet; Nico de Vries; Sjoerd M Lagarde; Bart A van Wagensveld
Journal:  Obes Surg       Date:  2016-04       Impact factor: 4.129

10.  A comparison between one- and two-stage revisional gastric bypass.

Authors:  Abbas Al-Kurd; Ronit Grinbaum; Ido Mizrahi; Ala'a Abubeih; Atara Indursky; Hani Abu Hamdan; Haggi Mazeh; Nahum Beglaibter
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2018-09-10       Impact factor: 4.584

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.